MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

The accuracy and safety of fluoroscopically guided percutaneous pedicle screws in the lumbosacral junction and the lumbar spine: a review of 880 screws

Chiu CK, Kwan MK, Chan CY, Schaefer C, Hansen-Algenstaedt N

Bone Joint J, 2015 Aug;97-B(8):1111-7.
PMID: 26224830 DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B8.35330

We undertook a retrospective study investigating the accuracy and safety of percutaneous pedicle screws placed under fluoroscopic guidance in the lumbosacral junction and lumbar spine. The CT scans of patients were chosen from two centres: European patients from University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany, and Asian patients from the University of Malaya, Malaysia. Screw perforations were classified into grades 0, 1, 2 and 3. A total of 880 percutaneous pedicle screws from 203 patients were analysed: 614 screws from 144 European patients and 266 screws from 59 Asian patients. The mean age of the patients was 58.8 years (16 to 91) and there were 103 men and 100 women. The total rate of perforation was 9.9% (87 screws) with 7.4% grade 1, 2.0% grade 2 and 0.5% grade 3 perforations. The rate of perforation in Europeans was 10.4% and in Asians was 8.6%, with no significant difference between the two (p = 0.42). The rate of perforation was the highest in S1 (19.4%) followed by L5 (14.9%). The accuracy and safety of percutaneous pedicle screw placement are comparable to those cited in the literature for the open method of pedicle screw placement. Greater caution must be taken during the insertion of L5 and S1 percutaneous pedicle screws owing to their more angulated pedicles, the anatomical variations in their vertebral bodies and the morphology of the spinal canal at this location.
Accuracy and safety of fluoroscopic guided percutaneous pedicle screws in thoracic and lumbosacral spine: a review of 2000 screws

Hansen-Algenstaedt N, Chiu CK, Chan CY, Lee CK, Schaefer C, Kwan MK

Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2015 Sep 1;40(17):E954-63.
PMID: 25929207 DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000958

Retrospective study.
Comparison Between Minimally Invasive Surgery and Conventional Open Surgery for Patients With Spinal Metastasis: A Prospective Propensity Score-Matched Study

Hansen-Algenstaedt N, Kwan MK, Algenstaedt P, Chiu CK, Viezens L, Chan TS, et al.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2017 May 15;42(10):789-797.
PMID: 27584676 DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001893

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective propensity score-matched study.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of minimal invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional open surgery for spinal metastasis patients.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is lack of knowledge on whether MIS is comparable to conventional open surgery in treating spinal metastasis.
METHODS: Patients with spinal metastasis requiring surgery from January 2008 to December 2010 in two spine centers were recruited. The demographic, preoperative, operative, perioperative and postoperative data were collected and analyzed. Thirty MIS patients were matched with 30 open surgery patients using propensity score matching technique with a match tolerance of 0.02 based on the covariate age, tumor type, Tokuhashi score, and Tomita score.
RESULTS: Both groups had significant improvements in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), Karnofsky scores, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and neurological status postoperatively. However, the difference comparing the MIS and open surgery group was not statistically significant. MIS group had significantly longer instrumented segments (5.5 ± 3.1) compared with open group (3.8 ± 1.7). Open group had significantly longer decompressed segment (1.8 ± 0.8) than MIS group (1.0 ± 1.0). Open group had significantly more blood loss (2062.1 ± 1148.0 mL) compared with MIS group (1156.0 ± 572.3 mL). More patients in the open group (76.7%) needed blood transfusions (with higher average units of blood transfused) compared with MIS group (40.0%). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in MIS group (116.1 ± 63.3 s) compared with open group (69.9 ± 42.6 s). Open group required longer hospitalization (21.1 ± 10.8 days) compared with MIS group (11.0 ± 5.0 days).
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that MIS resulted in comparable outcome to open surgery for patients with spinal metastasis but has the advantage of less blood loss, blood transfusions, and shorter hospital stay.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
Fulltext A Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data Reveals an Association between Circulating Levels of IGF-I and Prostate Cancer Risk

Travis RC, Appleby PN, Martin RM, Holly JMP, Albanes D, Black A, et al.

Cancer Res, 2016 04 15;76(8):2288-2300.
PMID: 26921328 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-1551

The role of insulin-like growth factors (IGF) in prostate cancer development is not fully understood. To investigate the association between circulating concentrations of IGFs (IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2, and IGFBP-3) and prostate cancer risk, we pooled individual participant data from 17 prospective and two cross-sectional studies, including up to 10,554 prostate cancer cases and 13,618 control participants. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the ORs for prostate cancer based on the study-specific fifth of each analyte. Overall, IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-2, and IGFBP-3 concentrations were positively associated with prostate cancer risk (Ptrend all ≤ 0.005), and IGFBP-1 was inversely associated weakly with risk (Ptrend = 0.05). However, heterogeneity between the prospective and cross-sectional studies was evident (Pheterogeneity = 0.03), unless the analyses were restricted to prospective studies (with the exception of IGF-II, Pheterogeneity = 0.02). For prospective studies, the OR for men in the highest versus the lowest fifth of each analyte was 1.29 (95% confidence interval, 1.16-1.43) for IGF-I, 0.81 (0.68-0.96) for IGFBP-1, and 1.25 (1.12-1.40) for IGFBP-3. These associations did not differ significantly by time-to-diagnosis or tumor stage or grade. After mutual adjustment for each of the other analytes, only IGF-I remained associated with risk. Our collaborative study represents the largest pooled analysis of the relationship between prostate cancer risk and circulating concentrations of IGF-I, providing strong evidence that IGF-I is highly likely to be involved in prostate cancer development. Cancer Res; 76(8); 2288-300. ©2016 AACR.